Wednesday, April 24, 2013

I’ve been noticing
that there are more films like this appearing on Netflix. This isn’t a film with one story, rather than
it is a multiple short films linked together by a thin strand of plot to make
one full length film. There are a few
decent ones I’ve seen. “Devils Carnival” is probably the best one I’ve seen
(yes, I’m counting it because each character got their own individual story and
song that was linked together by Lucifer telling 3 of Aesop’s Fables to the
character Daniel). There’s also “V/H/S/”
and “The Theatre Bizarre”. The film I’m
reviewing this week is called “Scary or Die”.
The plot to the film is based off a mysterious stranger searching
through videos on a website called Scaryordie.com where there are different
stories and videos for a person to click on and learn a story. One interesting thing about this film is some
of the actors appear in more than one story, but it doesn’t affect the plot of
the film as a whole; not even in the slightest bit. Rather than talk about the film as a whole
I’m just going to give a brief summary of each story and what I thought about
it. There will be Spoilers in this
review because I particularly didn’t find any of them to be all that good. If you want more reasons why just read the
rest of this review.

The Crossing

The First Story in
“Scary or Die” is “The Crossing”. It’s a
story about two red necks, who live in Arizona, and their hoochie
girlfriend. Recently, the two rednecks
have been abducting Mexican immigrants from all over the state, driving them
out to the border and executing them to “send a message” to all other illegal
immigrants who think about sneaking into the country. One day after murdering and burying their two
latest victims, one of them decides to add insult to injury by pissing all over
the graves. This for some reason or
another leads to the Mexican immigrants coming back as zombies and they attack
the rednecks and the hoochie girlfriend.
The zombies kill the rednecks, but the hoochie girlfriend manages to
escape, but she is later shot by the Border Patrol when she is mistaken for
zombie; implying that the Border Patrol was already aware of this zombie problem. In my opinion this was the least awful of the
stories in the film. It’s short, sweet, to the point, and the make-up effects
are half-way decent.

Tae Jung’s Lament

“Tae Jungs Lament” had
the most predictable story in “Scary or Die”.
It’s the story about a mourning widower named Tae Jung who lives in Los
Angeles, and he basically wanders around looking sad and mourning his late
wife. One day he witnesses a beautiful
women being abducted by a stranger.
Rather than use commonsense and report the abduction to police like a
sane person, he instead goes after the abductor and tosses his IPhone into the
car and then tracks the IPhone’s location on his laptop (again not ONCE does he consider calling
the police and telling them he witnessed an abduction and that he was able to
secretly track where this guy was going.
Tae Jung eventually finds them, knocks at the abductor and saves the
woman. The woman’s named is Min-ah (ßDRACULA REFERENCE!) and she
is so thankful for Tae Jung coming to rescue her, so she invites him over to
give him a reward. Unfortunately for
Tae Jung, the Min-Ah turns out to be a vampire and the guy who abducted her was
actually a vampire slayer, so sucks to be Tae Jung. If only he would’ve called the police and
reported the incident instead, he could have avoided this whole silly little
incident.

Re-Membered

It’s “The Tel-Tale
Heart”, but instead of a guy being buried under the house and the person
thinking they can hear the victims heart beat, it’s a dismembered body in the
trunk of the car and the driver thinks he hears a person knocking on the
trunk. It’s boring and it’s unoriginal.

Clowned

The Real reason we all checked it out.
He's on the Poster and the DVD Cover.

This is the longest
story in “Scary or Die”, it’s about a man named Emmet, whose just trying to
survive and take care of his mother and little brother. The day of his little brother’s birthday
party, he is attacked and bitten on the leg by “Fucko the Clown”. If being called “Fucko the Clown” wasn’t
ridiculous enough, he also wears the exact same costume and make-up that
American serial killer John Wayne Gacy wore; No freaking subtlety
whatsoever! It’s clear as day that this
clown was meant to look just like John Wayne Gacy! The clowns bite begins to take an effect on
Emmet and he slowly begins to turn into a “Were-Clown”??? I don’t f*cking know! This film story makes
no sense and it’s kind of all over the place.
Anyway Emmet tries to find the Clown that bit him so he can protect his
brother, but the longer Emmet stays a clown the more psychotic he becomes and
yearns to eat other peoples flesh. He
eventually saves his little brother Andy from being killed and eaten by Fucko
the Clown, but then Emmet decides he can no longer go on living for fear that
he might harm his little brother or another child. So he hangs out around a
play ground the police show up, he pulls out a fake gun and the police kill
him.

That is some Wicked Make-Up :)

Make’s no God d@mn sense,
huh? This story tries to condense and
force out way too much material in a short span. I will say this though; Emmet does turn into
a pretty gnarly clown with this permanent evil grin on his face. Even in the scenes where he’s sad and crying
he still has that evil smile on his face and it just looks cool. That unfortunately is the only positive thing
I have to say about this part of the film.
It was a stupid idea and it was poorly executed.

Lover Come Back

Spoiler alert: Her character is the framing device!

The last story in
“Scary or Die” is also the shortest and the Worst part of the film. A woman is beaten to death by her abusive
husband, her grandfather was a Voodoo Priest or Witch Doctor or I don’t give a
crap, and anyways he cast a spell on her as a child so she has the ability come
back from the dead so she does and she finds her ex-husband and kills him. The
End!

In 1939, the American public got what it had been
craving after three years of anticipation; a film adaptation of Margaret
Mitchell’s Civil War epic Gone With the
Wind. Despite the initial skepticism of readers, who were convinced that no
film could live up to the expectations of the novel, the film was an immediate
success. Over time, Gone With the Wind has
truly lived up to the expectations of its epic status and become firmly
ingrained in American popular culture. Unfortunately, as tastes in film and
cultural mores have changed, one of America’s most widely known films has also
become one of its most misunderstood. The film’s heroine, Scarlett O’Hara has
particularly borne the brunt of the public’s scorn, leading modern film goers
to dismiss her as vindictive or shrewish without having ever seen the film.
This review is dedicated to the iron willed Scarlett O’Hara-Hamilton-Kennedy-Butler,
and all of the world’s Scarlett’s who are too complicated and independent to be
ignored.

This Miss is no lady

1.SHE’S A MODERN WOMAN: Unlike
the heroines of many films both past and present, Scarlett is a multidimensional
woman who defies the rules of stock characters. While Hollywood’s all too common
“damsels in distress” spend the majority of their screen time either waiting to
be rescued by or selflessly dedicating themselves to a male character, Scarlett
remains firmly untamable. For instance, early in the film a teenaged Scarlett
complains to Mammy that she does not understand “why does a girl have to be so
silly to catch a husband”. This statement shows that she is not like the other
women in the film (or in many other films) in that she resents being forced to
“dumb down” and alter her personality in order to impress a man. She displays
further modernity in her pursuit of neighbor Ashley Wilkes when she disregards
the social mores of her time and takes on the dominant role in her interaction
with him. Later, after her first husband dies of pneumonia, she again refuses
to let society determine her fate and emerges from mourning as vivacious as
ever, much to the shock of her fellow Confederates. She further bucks Atlanta’s
strict social system when she openly fraternizes with war profiteer and social
maverick Rhett Butler. Rather than adhere to the superficial dictates of
society, Scarlett defies her role as a dedicated war widow, and instead pursues
an active life in which she chooses what she does and with whom she does it.

2.SHE’S BUSINESS SAVVY: Following
the ravages of the Civil War, Scarlett finds herself faced with adult
responsibilities for the first time. The most daunting of these
responsibilities is reviving the family plantation, Tara, after her mother’s
death and her father’s mental breakdown. Rather than wasting her time lamenting
her losses, she immediately sets to work harvesting the limited resources that
remain, and budgeting to make them last. She quickly takes on the role of
mistress of the plantation, and even swallows her pride to perform strenuous
work in the cotton fields. Despite her progress, she soon realizes that she
will have to look beyond her limited land in order to satisfy increasing tax
fees under Yankee occupation. She realizes the advantages of the ‘dumbed down’
behaviors she loathes, and dedicates herself to winning over the affection of
mild mannered businessman Frank Kennedy (despite his engagement to her sister).
Following her second marriage, Scarlett is not satisfied with mere contentment
and determines that it is Frank’s business, rather than his money that can help
her most. She then takes on an increasingly large role in her husband’s lumber
mill until she becomes the unofficial head of the business. Through her
tireless efforts, she eventually transforms the mill from a small business with
minor profits to a virtual monopoly worth a small fortune.

﻿

If looks could kill she wouldn't need a shotgun

3.SHE CAN SHOOT FROM THE HIP
(LITERALLY): While many heroines can talk a strong
game, few can truly ‘walk the walk’ quite like Scarlett. Throughout the film,
she is confronted with situations that test her cunning and grit. During the
siege of Atlanta, she manages to deliver Melanie’s baby without any medical
assistance after the majority of the city has already fled. With Rhett’s help,
she then takes Melanie, the baby, and her gratingly incompetent slave, Prissy,
and transports them to Tara. Before their journey is halfway through, Rhett
makes a last minute decision to support the dying Confederate cause and deserts
Scarlett to enlist. She is then left to fend for herself and her companions as
they travel across the war ravaged countryside. Later, she is confronted by a
Yankee deserter, who makes his intentions towards her clear. Rather than flee
or scream for help, she becomes her own savior and shoots her would-be attacker
in the face without batting an eye. When confronted with the Yankee’s
impossibly high taxes, she refuses to allow them to seize Tara. After
consulting an inept Ashley, she determines to take action herself and sets out
to charm Rhett into providing her the money. Although reduced to rags, she thinks
on her feet and creates a lavish dress from the plantation’s curtains that
showcases her creativity, even if it does fail to convince Rhett.

4.SHE’S LOYAL: Viewers’
most consistent complaints about Scarlett are her ‘selfishness’ and
‘ruthlessness’. Contrary to this perception, however, Scarlett does display
fierce loyalty to those whom she deems worthy. For instance, when she first
returned to Tara, she could have easily sent her family to live with distant
relatives, where they would be guaranteed hospitality free of charge. Rather
than shirk her responsibilities, however, she instead opts to not only remain
on the plantation, but also take on the majority of the duties that come with
it. She then proceeds to devote herself to providing for her family through
back breaking manual labor, and financial savvy. She even risks moral
debasement and social ostracization when she offers herself to Rhett as his
mistress in exchange for the necessary tax money for Tara. She also displays a begrudging
loyalty to Melanie after she promises Ashley to look after Melanie and their
baby while he is away at war. Although she could have left for Tara before the
Yankees arrived in Atlanta, she chose to stay behind and assist a bed-ridden
Melanie, despite the danger. Above all, Scarlett maintains constant loyalty to
the memory of her parents in her efforts to not only revive Tara to its former
glory, but also bring it to a new, even greater success.

After all, tomorrow is another day!

5.SHE ALWAYS RISES AGAIN: Like
a mythical phoenix, Scarlett is reduced to near ashes by life over and over,
but she always rises again. She survives losses that would crush an average
person and still manages to keep going. Before the film’s intermission, she has
already outlived her first husband, and arrives home to find that her mother
has died. She also witnesses the mental deterioration of her father, who
succumbs to dementia following the death of her mother. She survives the
horrors of war and the agony of enemy occupation. She eventually suffers the loss
of both her daughter and best friend towards the end of the film, but still
manages to look towards tomorrow. Even the loss of her marriage to Rhett, the
one person who truly understood her, does not lead her to accept defeat.
Through her relentless determination to face life on her own terms she
personifies both resilience and independence, making her a true heroine of
American culture. It is little wonder that her story became a black market hit
in numerous oppressed countries, including nations occupied by both Nazi
Germany and the Soviet Union, as she continues to provide inspiration and hope
to those facing adversity. She may have had to lie, cheat, steal, and kill, but
she survived to see another day. For this reason, Scarlett O’Hara is a true
heroine for the ages who we owe it to ourselves to give a damn about.

Thursday, April 18, 2013

By the 1960’s, the Hollywood studio system had
reached its end, ushering in a new era of independent productions and fresh
faces. While the end of the studio system meant greater freedom for rising
stars, it also meant the end of an era for many icons of the system’s Golden
Age. As a result of the emerging changes in the industry, many fading stars
quietly stepped aside and retired from the business. Some actors, however,
refused to accept that their best years were behind them and chose to cling to
any work that they could find, accepting bit parts or work in minor films that
did not utilize their talents. Fortunately, a select few actors managed to
reinvent themselves and establish second careers that enabled them to become
icons to a new generation. In one instance, not one, but two careers were
revived through an unlikely collaboration between legendary rivals. The
resulting film was the horror camp classic Whatever
Happened to Baby Jane?, which launched the comeback careers of leading
ladies Bette Davis and Joan Crawford as mistresses of horror.

The film begins with a flashback to ‘Baby’ Jane
Hudson’s childhood as a successful, vaudeville star in 1917. Her time on the stage
proves to have been the high point of Jane’s life, as when the scene flashes
forward to 1933 it is revealed that she has grown up to be an out of work
actress with the start ofa drinking
problem. As Jane’s life has begun to decline, her older sister, Blanche, has
become a Hollywood success, and the family’s new meal ticket. After clips are
shown of yet another of Jane’s failed screen tests, the two sisters are seen
arriving home from a Hollywood party. One sister remains in the car as the other
exits the vehicle to open the front gate of their house (their faces are never
shown in this scene). Suddenly, the sister in the car puts the vehicle in gear
and runs the other sister down. The scene fades out as footsteps and crying are
heard off screen. The film then flashes ahead to 1960 as the sisters continue
to live together in their old house. Jane is now a slovenly alcoholic who shows
signs of mental instability, while Blanche attempts to remain optimistic
despite the fact that she is confined to a wheel chair.

As the film progresses, Jane declines further into
mental illness and keeps Blanche a prisoner in the house while she attempts to
revive her childhood career. The plot quickly becomes a struggle between reason
and insanity as Blanche tries to break free from Jane, who has surrendered to
her illness and retreated into memories of her childhood. Despite the fact that
Jane is clearly the villain of the story, Davis manages to gain the audience’s
sympathy through her portrayal of a woman whose life has passed her by. By the
same token, Crawford holds her own against Davis (who has the arguably more
interesting part) by maintaining a restrained performance that adds realism to
the often hysterical plot. Although the film is technically classified as
horror, there are enough moments of cynical humor, outlandish plot twists, and
criticisms of Hollywood to qualify Whatever
Happened to Baby Jane? as a black comedy.

Because the film has a relatively simple premise,
its true strength lies in the interactions between its characters. Both Davis
and Crawford add layers to their caricatured roles as a faded movie star and
her deranged former child star sister. For instance, while Crawford seems to be
a helpless victim at the film’s start, she imbues Blanche with enough warmth, and
later resilience to make her a character that audiences can identify with and
feel for. Similarly, Davis’ mix of beaten woman and wounded child provides Jane
with a complexity that is rarely found in horror villains. The supporting cast
is equally excellent, with Victor Buono’s hilariously smug turn as
pianist/gigolo Edwin Flagg proving especially memorable.

Although they had once been the undisputed queens of
the silver screen, by 1960 Bette Davis and Joan Crawford were struggling to
find work. When Hollywood’s Golden Age ended, the predominance of strong female
parts also ended, resulting in a lack of opportunities for actresses who were
too old to play ‘pretty young things’ and ingénues. Landing a part became so
difficult for Davis that at one point she placed an ad in a Los Angeles
newspaper that described her as an actress with “thirty three years experience”
who “wants steady employment in Hollywood”. The studio scoffed at the idea of
casting Davis and Crawford, even in decidedly unglamorous parts, with Warner
Brothers head Jack L. Warner saying, “I wouldn’t give a plugged nicked for
either one of those two old broads”. Regardless of how Warner and other studio
executives regarded the pair, director Robert Aldrich saw an opportunity to
draw audiences while simultaneously thumbing his nose at Hollywood and the
‘monsters’ it often creates.

What's for din-din?

The pairing of icons Davis and Crawford led to
fireworks both onscreen and off, just as the director hoped. Early in their
careers, Davis and Crawford formed a bitter rivalry, which some reports
indicate started when Davis had an affair with Crawford’s then husband Douglas
Fairbanks Jr., and which was undoubtedly further fueled by their fight for box
office supremacy. Although Crawford generally avoided discussing other stars,
Davis candidly shared her feelings towards Crawford saying, “Why am I so good
at playing bitches? I think it’s because I’m not a bitch. Maybe that’s why she
(Joan Crawford) always plays ladies”. The actresses’ off-screen resentment
carried over behind the cameras during production, resulting in a series of mean-spirited
pranks between the two. Regardless of any tension behind the scenes, both women
were able to maintain professionalism in front of the cameras and produce
career reviving performances. Following the success of this film, both Davis
and Crawford went on to have successful careers in horror that introduced them
to another generation of film goers.

It's like looking into the future, isn't it?

Through its combination of Hollywood nostalgia, camp
hijinks, and genuine terror, Whatever
Happened to Baby Jane? became, and remains, a classic. The film’s success
led to a series of imitations and parodies that have ensured its place in
popular culture. This film proved to have a lasting influence upon the film
industry that resulted in numerous similar tales of child stardom gone wrong
and old age gone psychotic. It also revived the careers of two Hollywood
legends, ensuring that fans will never need to ask, “whatever happened to Bette
and Joan?”. I highly recommend this film to fans of horror and black comedy.
Give this film a try and you’ll learn what really happened to Jane, and much
more.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Confessions of a Film Junkie: A review of “Monsters: Humanoids
from the Deep”

By: Brian Cotnoir

You know what; I’ll
give the makers of this film some credit for creativity. When you essentially combine “Jaws”, “Alien”,
and “Evil Dead” into one horror film it sounds like a great idea and noble
effort. Unfortunately when you have no
budget for decent effects and actors that make the cast of “The Crawlers” look
like World Class Shakespearean Actors, your ideas are going to come up a little
short. But still I feel like I must give
a fair and just review to the 1980’s Horror film “Humanoids from the Deep” or “Monster”
as it is also known as.

So the plot to
the film goes something like this: The small fishing community of Noyo has
fallen on some tough times. The town’s
primary source of income comes from salmon fishing, but this year the salmon
aren’t biting and town is on the verge of financial ruin. Rumors that a large canning company wants to
open a factory in Noyo could mean jobs for all of their residents, but
something strange begins to happen. One
night all the dogs in town are slaughtered, and then women in town begin to
disappear, the town is in a panic because not only are they losing residents,
but they’re about to lose the canning companies business as well. As it turns out a group of humanoid sea
creatures were accidentally released into the waters near Noyo, and now they’ve
evolved to the point where they can attack humans and are driven by a desire to
breed with human women. Now it’s up to
the residents to stop these creatures before they destroy the whole town.

Silly Effects are Silly

This
film is just silly. Nothing about it is
scary in the least bit. The humanoid
monsters have to be some of the lamest and cheapest costumes I have ever seen
in a film. Unless you’re 5-years-old you
will not find these creatures to be even a little bit scary. Some of the other effects, however, are way over the top. I mean it seems like every time a person
lights a small fire a catastrophicexplosion follows. The opening scene shows a young boy
accidentally knocking over a gallon container of gas, and then once a spark
reaches it the whole boat explodes thirty feet in the air. There’s another scene where the town’s
residents throw a Molotov cocktail at the home of the town’s only Native
American resident and it wipes out like 3 acres of land. For crying out loud was their napalm in C-4
in that bottle? Most of the actors in
this film are bad. The only real notable actor in this film is Vic Murrow (before his decapitation). I’m convinced that most of the “female
victims” in the film got their roles, not because of their acting, but because
they look good with their clothes off.

No lie, this is from the actual film; Total rip-off of "Alien"

The
one major flaw this film had going for it was it could not decide what genre it
was going with? It tried being a sci-fi
tale, a cabin in the woods horror, and Sea Monster film. You could make a drinking game out of how
many references to “Alien” and “Jaws” that appear in this film (anyone else
notice the number of films I review for this blog that reference “Jaws”? It’s kind of a strange coincidence, don’t you
think?) Well nonetheless this is one of
those movies that’s so bad it’s funny. I
think this film is ideal for a “Bad Movie Night Drinking Game”, but nothing
else. It’s cheesy, it’s childish, and
it’s just a generic early 80’s horror film.

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Critics often say that the best year in American
cinema was 1939. That year Hollywood produced an unusually high number of
financial and artistic successes that led to an Oscars ceremony that was
nothing short of nail biting. 1939 saw the release of such classics as The Wizard of Oz, Mr. Smith Goes to
Washington, Stagecoach, Destry Rides Again, Wuthering Heights, and Gone with the Wind. Several of these
films proved to have groundbreaking effects upon the history of American film.
One of the less well known classics of 1939 proved to have an even greater effect
than its contemporaries, as it went on to influence the business of its
producing studio, the career of its leading lady, and even the outcome of an
international election. This film is the political satire/romantic comedy Ninotchka.

Oh, that Greta!

Ninotchka
combines
the Hollywood standard ‘boy meets girl’ scenario with a scathing critique of
life in the USSR. The film begins with Soviet envoys Buljanoff, Iranoff, and
Kopalski arriving in Paris to complete a transaction on behalf of the Soviet
government. The transaction involves the legally convoluted sale of several
expensive jewels that had been confiscated from Grand Duchess Swana during the
Russian Revolution. The three bumblers are dazzled by the beauty and carefree
atmosphere of the city, and almost immediately find themselves on the path to
capitalism. Their conversion is accelerated by the arrival of French
aristocrat/gigolo, Leon D’Algout, who is in the midst of an affair with Swana,
and takes it upon himself to bring the sale to the French courts. Although the
three Soviets initially resent Leon’s interference, they are soon won over by
his charms, and discard their political obligations to indulge in the high life
he presents to them. Word quickly reaches Moscow of the men’s incompetence, and
the Soviet government dispatches envoy Nina Ivanovna Yakushova, aka Ninotchka.
Upon her arrival, Ninotchka is a stern and grim woman whose only concerns are
her obligations to the Soviet Union. After a chance meeting with Leon, however,
Ninotchka also finds herself becoming susceptible to the charms of Paris. After
much politically tinged verbal fencing, Ninothcka and Leon begin a relationship
and learn that there more to life than high society’s mindless parties and
communism’s brotherly love.

Looks like someone just saw "Office Space" for the 1st time

In many ways, Ninotchka
was ahead of its time. Although several films in 1939 explored both
contemporary and historical politics, the makers of Ninotchka took their film a step further by not only incorporating
criticism of a foreign nation into its script, but basing the film’s entire
premise upon that criticism. By the time the United States entered World War II
in 1941, the USSR became one of the United States’ most important allies, and
such criticism would become strictly forbidden in American cinema until the
start of the Cold War. Although the Soviet Union was still an ally of Nazi
Germany’s (as of the 1939 Soviet Non-Agression Pact), many in the United States
were sympathetic to the Soviet cause, particularly artists. Throughout the
1930’s, various high profile actors, writers, and film makers offered their
financial and public endorsements to the Soviet Union, which they believed really
was the ‘workers’ paradise’ that its propaganda claimed it to be.

Those Commie B@stahd's!

The MGM team behind Ninotchka defied popular trends by successfully revealing and
criticizing the reality of Stalin’s Russia through a combination of screwball
antics and dead pan humor. The film includes a virtually nonstop series of
anti-communist ‘one liners’ including “Comrade, I’ve been fascinated by your
five-year plan for the last fifteen years!” and “the last mass trials were a
great success; there will be fewer but better Russians”. Through its
exceptional writing and delivery, the film manages to inform viewers of such
weighty issues as Stalin’s purges and the instability of Soviet economics
without once breaking its rapid pace or losing its sense of humor. This use of
satire ultimately led to the film being banned in the Soviet Union and its
satellite states. In an interesting turn of events, the United States
government later used the film as a propaganda device in the Italian elections
of 1947 to 1948. In order to combat the spread of communism to formerly fascist
Italy, U. S. covert operations embarked upon a sophisticated propaganda
campaign, which included repeated showings of Ninotchka. After the election was won by the Christian Democrat
Party, one communist worker reportedly lamented “what licked us was Ninotchka”.

"Michelle Bachman is running for President? Pfffft XD"

Although the inclusion of political humor was
clearly a risky decision, the greatest risk that MGM took in making Ninotchka may have been its choice to
cast Greta Garbo as its leading lady. From the mid 1920’s to the mid 1930’s,
Garbo was the undisputed queen of MGM, and a consistent box-office draw. By
1939, however, her career began to lag following the commercial failure of her
historical romance Conquest two years
earlier. After being typecast first as a ‘femme fatale’ in her silent years and
later as a tragic ‘fallen woman’ after the advent of talkies, she began to wear
on audiences who were tired of seeing her in what was essentially a series of
variations on the same character. In a surprise decision, MGM determined that
the problem was not Garbo, but the parts that she was repeatedly cast in. In
order to capitalize upon her maiden voyage into comedy, the studio recycled her
old tag line from her first talking picture (Anna Christie), “Garbo Talks!” and changed it to “Garbo Laughs!”.
The change of pace was a success for Garbo and earned her a Best Actress Oscar nomination. Unfortunately, the success of Ninotchka was not able to completely
revive her career, and she retired from acting after the commercial failure of
her romantic comedy Two Faced Woman two
years later.

Although it is often eclipsed by its more renowned
contemporaries, Ninotchka truly was a
classic in 1939 and remains so today. The film daringly combined politics and
humor in a time when international relations were often precarious at best,
paving the way for political satire in Hollywood. This film also allowed
audiences a glimpse of Greta Garbo’s acting range and comedic talents, causing
many audience members to lament ‘what might have been’. Through its combination
of dry wit and unabashed romanticism Ninotchka
provides its audiences with a brief escape into a Parisian fantasy, while
simultaneously reminding them of the possibilities of a well-executed romantic
comedy. To quote the film’s poster, don’t pronounce it, watch it; you won’t be
disappointed.

How awesome is Tim
Daly? I mean when you’re the voice of
Superman/Clark Kent being awesome is kind of a requirement for the job. Though like many others in my age group I
think more people recognize Tim Daly for his voice acting than his live action
performing. Recently, I saw a film
starring Tim Daly called “The Skeptic”, and I was very impressed with this
film. It’s kind of like a B-Movie
version of “Insidious”, so let’s dive into this film, and I will explain why.

So “The Skeptic” is focused
around the life of Tim Daly’s character, an attorney named Bryan Becket. Bryan’s Aunt recently passes away and seeing
as he is her only living relative he becomes the new owner of her house. Bryan is a very bland, unfeeling person and
people begin to resent him for it. He
claims that his attitude and inability to have strong emotions is just part of
who he is, but his wife begins to question his constant emotionless state. Soon after he puts his Aunts old house on the
market, Bryan’s best friend and Law Partner (played by Tom Arnold) tells him
that his Aunt actually wrote a will and she left her house to a man named Dr.
Warren Koven, who runs a Sleepy Study Lab at a local college. Bryan is outraged and confronts Dr. Koven to
tell him that he’s not getting the house. As it turns out Dr. Koven wasn’t
treating Bryan’s Aunt for sleep troubles, he was actually searching her house
for spirits. As a hobby Dr. Koven also
runs a lab to test for E.S.P., and he went to Bryan’s Aunt’s house to see if it
was haunted. The ever skeptical, Bryan,
doesn’t believe what Dr. Koven is doing is anything worthwhile, but pretty soon
he begins to claim more and more that he’s seeing ghost in his house, and soon
with the help of Dr. Koven and others Bryan begins to learn and uncover much
more about his life than he ever realized.

Tim Daly is Awesome

Tim
Daly, just gives a fantastic performance in this film. I’d say it’s one of the best acting
performances I’ve ever seen. I know
that’s quite a bold statement to make about a film that nobody’s ever heard of,
but it’s true. When the film starts out
he’s just this quiet, straight-talking, no frills, no nonsense kind of a
guy. He has his daily routine and will
not deviate from it for anything. As the
movie progresses we see him dive deeper into paranoia, but despite all the
strange things that keep happening to him, he tries to use logic and skepticism
to explain everything. The scenes
towards the end of the film where he does his soul searching and uncovers the
truths to his past just explain so much about his character early on in the
film, and it’s just great to see him do a complete 180 with his character.

He's been in worst films people

This film
also has a great supporting cast. Tom
Arnold, plays Tim Daly’s boss and business partner, and normally I don’t like
films that feature Tom Arnold, but he was actually quite good in “The
Skeptic”. Actor Bruce Altman plays Dr.
Koven, and I just like how even though he’s a Professor at a College and believes
in E.S.P., he still tries to use logic and other theories to explain what’s
happening to Tim Daly’s character, rather than claiming that it is ghosts that
are haunting him right from the beginning.
There’s also a Priest in the film that Tim Daly’s character also goes to
for guidance. Daly’s character is not a
religious man, but the Priest is an old family friend who knew Bryan’s parents
very well and knew him from a very young age, and he actually tells Bryan the
truth about his Aunt’s old house and it causes him to uncover some repressed
memories and really adds to the development of Tim Daly’s character.

She was pretty useless to the film

Towards the end of the film Bryan get’s
help from a student of Dr. Koven’s named, Cassie, but I think she was more of a
filler than anything. She’s a psychic who also helps out Tim Daly’s
character, and helps him confront his past so that he can go on with his life.
I really think her character could have been replaced by Dr. Koven and the film
would have flowed together much better. I
assume the addition of Cassie to the plot was just an attempt to appease any
female demographic who watched this film.

There
are a few jump scares in the film, but nothing really out of the ordinary
terrifying. A lot of the jump scares
have some great build up leading up to them that were totally worth it when
they happened, and other times throughout the film the buildup leads to
nothing. As a horror movie, this film
isn’t really all that scary, but as a mystery film it gets to be pretty good at
parts. I think people should see it just
to see Tim Daly’s performance, but there are other things in the film that you
are sure to like as well, so do yourself a favor and check out the film “The
Skeptic”

Friday, April 5, 2013

From the advent of silent pictures through the Golden Age of
cinema, Hollywood was controlled by a system of production studios. Although
each studio had its own sensibility and style, they all managed to release a
startling amount of films across various genres each year. As remains the case
today, the studios would often produce “B-pictures” that contained little
substance but guaranteed to produce a sizable profit. In a few notable
instances, these studio after-thoughts managed to rise above the expectations
of cast, crew, and audience to become landmarks of popular culture. One of
these unexpected gems was the 1942 horror film Cat People, which has since become a genre classic.

Cat People was the
first of three successful collaborations between director Jacques Tourneur and
producer Val Lewton, which also included I
Walked with a Zombie (1943) and The
Leopard Man (1943). The script originated as a pulp magazine short story
written by Val Lewton in 1930 called The
Bagheeta, which details the adventures of a Russian soldier as he attempts
to kill a mythical femme fatale known for seducing and killing the men she
comes in contact with. As the story evolved, the setting was moved from the
forests of Russia to 1940’s New York and the femme fatale was changed to a
reluctant anti-heroine.

The film opens as newly arrived Serbian immigrant Irene Dubrovna
draws sketches by the panther cage in the Central Park Zoo. Irena is distracted
from her work by local engineer Oliver Reed, who chastises her for littering.
The two strike up a conversation and he accompanies her out of the zoo. As they
leave, however, the audience glimpses one of Irena’s discarded sketches on the
ground; an ominous drawing of a panther with a sword through its heart. Irena
later invites Oliver to her apartment

This kitty's got claws

for tea and tells him of the legend of the cat people that haunted her village in Serbia. According to the legend, the
people of Irena’s village turned to devil worship and were punished for their
misdeeds by the fictional King John. She fearfully explains that the “wisest
and most wicked” of the corrupted citizens managed to escape into the mountains,
and continue to haunt the village with their memory. Oliver laughs at what he
considers an old world superstition and disregards Irena’s obvious anxiety.
Oliver continues to ignore Irena’s fears and eventually marries her despite the
fact that she refuses to kiss him, let alone consummate the marriage, for fear
that sexual passion will unleash the curse of her village. He tolerates her
unusual behavior, but continues to treat her like a misguided child throughout
their marriage. Eventually, the idea of a celibate marriage becomes too much
for Oliver to withstand and he seeks comfort from his co-worker, Alice, who has
no qualms about revealing her feelings for him. It is this act of marital
betrayal that finally drives Irena to her breaking point, and unleashes the
“cat woman” within her.

Oh Hai, Crazy Cat Lady

Cat People stands out
from other horror films through the types of fears it instills in audiences,
and the way in which it executes its thrills. While most horror films focus on
an outside source of fear, Cat People maintains
an inward focus on Irena’s fears and struggles to overcome them. Through its
focus on the protagonist’s internal struggle, the film forces the audience to
consider their own fears, however irrational they may be. The clash between the
mystical forces of Irena’s past and the clinical explanations provided by her
husband, and later her psychiatrist, provide another conflict; one between
tradition and modernity. This struggle in turn brings another, much more real
fear into the scope of the plot; mental instability. While perceptions of
mental illness have become more sensitive today, in the 1940’s the mentally ill
were routinely institutionalized in mental hospitals where they were often
subjected to rudimentary treatments and questionable conditions. By including
the possibility of mental illness in the plot, the filmmakers create fear for as well as of Irena as she starts to
unravel while grappling with rejection from her husband and unwanted sexual
advances from her psychiatrist.

The film’s greatest triumph is its ability to create suspense
through implication rather than explanation. Throughout the film, it is implied
that extreme passions such as lust and jealousy will cause Irena to transform
into a blood thirsty panther. Despite this implication, no transformation is
ever explicitly shown, and the constant integration of rational explanations
into the story casts doubt as to whether such a transformation does in fact
take place. The few occasions that a panther is shown are restricted to Irena’s
observation of the panther in the zoo and one scene in which what appears to be
a panther (the creature is largely kept in shadow) stalks Alice and Oliver in
their office after hours. By keeping the dreaded monster off-screen for the
majority of the picture, Lewton and Tourneur allowed audiences to create an
image in their own minds more terrifying than anything 1940’s special effects
could produce.

Through its combination of subtle visuals effects and
psychological conflict, Cat People has
become the little “B-Picture” that could and maintains a lasting influence in
horror and suspense films. While it does not provide the violence or gore that
are used to shock audiences today, the film still manages to unsettle through
its eerie atmosphere and implications of the sinister. Tourneur’s effective use
of shadow and trick of building up to a moment of suspense are key elements of
the film’s success that have been recycled in countless other suspense and
horror films. I wholeheartedly recommend this film to fans of horror, suspense,
and those brave souls willing to take a brief venture into the unknown.

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Confessions of a Film Junkie: a review of “Blood Night: The
Legend of Mary Hatchet”

By: Brian Cotnoir

I swear to your God that the writer and
director of this film, Frank Sabatella, has one of the worst cases of Adult
ADHD I have ever seen, and it shows.
This film is all over the place.
It’s like he started writing one horror film and then 20 minutes in
decided to write a story to another horror film, and then 20 minutes after that
he started writing the story to a different film! Not to mention this film helped me set a
personal best record for watching a film.
Normally I can guess the outcome to the plot of a film I’ve never seen
before within 35-45 minutes, but for the film “Blood Night: The Legend of Mary
Hatchet” I shattered my old record.
Shortly after the 8 minute mark I accurately guessed how the film was
going to end! I hadn’t even been
introduced to most of the main cast and within 8 minutes I predicted how this
film was going to end. Looking back that
should have been my signal to skip the film entirely, because I already knew
how it was going to end. But you came to
read a review of an awful horror film, and I’m going to deliver.

Lizzie Borden Wannabe

So “Blood Night: The Legend of Mary
Hatchet” is a 2009 Horror film that—like I said—is kind of all over the place. It starts off in Long Island, New York in
1978, and a young girl named Mary “Hatchet” Mattock butchers her parents to
death. Why does Mary murder her parents?
I don’t know, Frank Sabatella forgot to write in a motive, but that wasn’t
going to stop him from carrying on with this crap fest of a film. Actually to be fair, they briefly touch upon it in the opening
credits that she has some condition that causes her to “Menstruate” excessively
(Eeeeeeeeewwwwwwww!) and that somehow contributes to some massive psychological
defect that causes her to become a mute homicidal maniac.

What???

The
film flashes forward to nine years later, and Mary’s now a young woman and is
locked up in a room in a mental asylum...naked?
Why does the hospital let her sit around naked all day? She wasn’t naked when they found her earlier
in the film so why do they let her sit around her room naked all day long? Any way’s I’m getting away from the plot, but
I do have a valid point to make about this later. So one night a security guard spots Mary
sitting naked in her room and decides to go in and rape her. Mary gets pregnant as a result of the rape,
and all the Doctors in the hospital are outraged, but decide it’s in everyone’s
best interest to not have the child
aborted or have the guard fired and arrested (FYI, whether you’re pro-choice or
pro-life, keep your personal feelings about abortion OUT OF THE COMMENT
SECTION!). So Mary has her baby, but it “dies”. So Mary becomes very upset
and somehow manages to break out of her room and murder everyone who works in
the Hospital. How is that even
possible? For one thing, how did she
break out of her room without making any noise or anyone noticing? Second of all are you really trying to convince
me that one woman in her early 20’s could not be stopped or slowed down and
managed to kill every single employee of a mental hospital? Yeah, I’m not buying it! So Mary wanders out of the Hospital and is
found by two cops wandering around the property naked with a severed head. So despite not having any lethal weapons the
police decide to open fire and kill Mary after she tosses the head at their car
and begins to scream. In the real world,
both of those officers would be fired—or at least suspended—for using excessive
force on an unarmed perpetrator.

Watch out for the Horror cliche fairy!

The
youth of Long Island decide to take this colorful
incident and now every year on the anniversary of the massacre they hold an
annual celebration of mischief and chaos known as “Blood Night”. Yet, another thing in the film that makes no
sense; this event is not like Halloween in Salem, MA or Sleepy Hollow, NY, it’s
a festival to celebrate a killer. What
town would allow this? I don’t think if
you go to Plainfield, Wisconsin that they hold an annual festival celebrating
the murders of Ed Gein, but again why am I wasting time on things in the film
that don’t make any sense. It’d be a lot
easier—and a hell of a lot less stressful—to list all the things in this film
that are done right!

You're too good for this film, Bill. What were you thinking?

So
our main characters, and I call them characters instead of heroes because heroes is a term that implies that we actually like
them, go to the cemetery where Mary is buried and try to contact the spirit of
Mary Hatchet using a Ouija board (freaking cliché enough for you?!). While in the cemetery they are spotted by the
cemeteries loveable drunken caretaker “Graveyard Gus”, played by B-Horror Movie Legend Bill Moseley. Gus tells the kids
(and the films audience) the third different Legend of Mary Hatchet story in
the film. The kids leave Gus, and head
back to the house for an alcohol fueled orgy, and that’s pretty much the next
thirty minutes of the film. You know for
a film called “Blood Night”, there’s certainly not a lot of blood being shown. There’s more hardcore nudity and sex scenes
then murders scenes at this point in the film, and all I could think of during
this part is I’m so bored, and can’t wait for people to start dying. Oh another thing that this film does is make
a big deal about how excited the kids are to watch “Attack of the Killer
Tomatoes” at the house. I know there’s a
taboo in film where you’re not supposed to reference better films in your own
film, and it’s pretty sad that referencing a film as bad as “Attack of the Killer
Tomatoes” is implying that “Killer Tomatoes” is more credible then your film.

I expected better from you to, Ms. Harris

At the party a new girl
named Alissa has moved back to Long Island from Chicago. She’s played by actress Danielle Harris, and
is clearly the long lost daughter of Mary Hatchet who has returned to kill all
the teens. All right, I’m done wasting
time talking about this films lack of plot, I’m speeding through. So kids at the party start turning up dead,
they think it’s the ghost of Mary Hatchet; it turns out its Alissa who is
Mary’s long lost daughter. She kills
them all with a pick axe and scissors.
The End!

What watching this film feels like!

Santa Maria this movie is bad! And the reason why it’s so bad is that it has
a story that’s all over the place. It’s
like three horror film plots trying to combine into one, not to mention has a
lot of things that don’t make sense. How
does menstruating an excessive amount of blood (eeeeewwwwwwww!) turn you into a
psychotic murder? And seriously what’s with the unnecessary nudity? Even Mary’s ghost is seen wandering around
naked, why is that? Did the undertaker’s
really think something like “Well no one’s coming to her funeral so why don’t
we just not even bother to put a dress on her and bury her as is?”. Or maybe it was contractual nudity stating
that actress Samantha Siong had to appear nude for the part in the film, or you
know maybe Frank Sabatella is just a pervert and wanted to exploit a pretty
young woman on screen. Don’t waste any
time of this film, it’s a film so bad that not even Bill Moseley and Danille
Harris could save it. It’s Just Sucks.